My Marriage Manifesto: Because Alliteration Works, but Marriage Currently Doesn't

Recently the state of California decided to uphold Proposition 8, the ban on same-sex marriage. I am a strong supporter of gay marriage but that is not what I want to discuss. I have realized after countless debates that this is an issue people don’t change their minds about, like abortion and euthanasia. Besides that there are plenty of articles out there that present excellent arguments in support of gay marriage so my opinions are superfluous. However, I did get into a discussion with someone about this issue and the “sanctity of marriage” came up. This is something that in my opinion is not debated enough so I think it deserves some attention.

Now some clarification:

1. I am not against marriage. I think plenty of marriages have worked and do work.

2. I am not the product of a broken marriage. My parents had a great marriage. My arguments are based on education and observation, not emotional fragility…so don’t go there.

So time to vent. People are against gay marriage because it would disturb the “sanctity of marriage.”

Oh I’m sorry, is marriage sacred?

Wives cheat on their husbands. Husbands beat or threaten to beat their wives. Wives lie to their husbands about their finances. Husbands look at pornography. And every day a husband and wife file for divorce. I don’t have to throw statistics at you because you’ve heard them all. They’re abysmal. What about this is sacred exactly?

You can imagine my frustration when I see individuals that treat marriage with such blatant disrespect when it is legally considered a PRIVILEGE and not a RIGHT. My heart goes out to the LGBT community that has to stand by and watch this horrible behavior, all the while being told that this is what “the sanctity of marriage” looks like. If that’s the case, they are probably better off.

Marriage is a spiritual contract and it needs to be treated as such. It should not be considered a religious obligation, a convenience, or a moral solution. Marriage is SUPPOSED to be a lifelong commitment based on unconditional love, trust, and respect…instead it has been turned into an as-long-as-I‘m-interested commitment based on insurance benefits, gift registries, and the “be fruitful and increase in number” verse. Our society’s obsession with instant gratification has made marriages disposable.

This is an all or nothing venture in my mind and once you make that choice you better be 100% behind it because the world is going to throw some crazy shit your way. If you don’t take responsibility for your commitment, don’t expect the rest of the world to take your commitment seriously. Comedians will continue to mock it, gold-diggers will continue to take advantage of it, and young people will continue to resent it.

And yes, the gay community will continue to fight for it.

To Ban or Not to Ban?

Tracy-Clark Flory at Salon.com has written an interesting article concerning a debate on banning burqas in France. While burqas may make the general public uncomfortable the majority of women wearing them are doing so by religious choice and not under threat or by force as the common misconception suggests. Wouldn't a ban on wearing burqas "subjugate" women as much as the act of wearing them does?

Read her thoughts and decide for yourself...definitely some food for thought. Comments are welcome as always.

Video Killed the Romance: Why Facebook is an Epic Fail in Building Relationships

Relationship etiquette is an art form. It used to be if you met someone you were kind of/possibly interested in, the first thing you would do was grill a common friend for information. Is he single? Is he employed? Is he literate?

Now when you meet someone the first thing you do is add them as a friend on Facebook.

If they accept your request you now have access to the holy grail of personal information about this individual. Too much information. Not only do you know their current relationship status but you also know their taste in music, how photogenic they are, and what Grey’s Anatomy character they most resemble.

Way to kill the mystery.

You used to work for this information. You would go on three or four dates before you started discussing bands you have seen play live or what pizza toppings are non-negotiable. Grey’s Anatomy references wouldn’t come up until at least date #10. Isn’t that the point of dating? To get to know the other person?

We are taking the fun out of getting to know individuals for who they are by making the personal virtual. People can not be summed up in a neat little package of pictures, quotes, and interests. You might be surprised by how much you like a person that, according to their profile, you don’t have much in common with. The expression “opposites attract” didn’t come out of thin air. Someone somewhere understood that a genuine connection is more about how someone laughs, how someone speaks to you, how someone treats their waiter than whether they like the same movies as you.

Also, there is a fine line between stalking and research. Anyone who has had a “facebook stalker” knows exactly what I am talking about. You will know who that person is because the next time you see them they’ll make some completely random reference to a picture you posted 32 seconds ago. These people are probably just bored but it doesn’t remove the creep factor. Tell them to take up scrapbooking or something.

Honestly I am most concerned about the generation born after us, the generation that has grown up with computer technology as an unquestioned element of their day-to-day life. These individuals are more likely to send you a Facebook message than actually pick up the phone and call you. How are they going to survive a face-to-face interview, or a conversation with a grieving friend, let alone a date?

In the long run we end up doing more harm than good because most of us make a much better impression in person than in writing. For example, I might come off as scary in print but in reality I’m quite merciful.

It just takes way too much effort to be this sassy in person.

Sexist Advertising At Its Best

Both tactful AND subtle...

Being Chaste for Change: Challenging the "Right" of "Conjugal Rights"

Two articles have recently caught my attention concerning the idea of “conjugal rights.”

The first is an older article but since reading it I have not been able to get it out of my head. In the beginning of May, the Center for Rights Education and Awareness in Kenya urged women to abstain from sex for one week to protest political unrest due to poor relations between President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga.

Two things happened; first and foremost, the strike worked. Change was initiated. No violence, no assembling of the masses; just a bunch of women abstaining for seven full days. These women are GENIUS…it makes me wonder if they inadvertently discovered the solution for World Peace.

The second repercussion was the subject of this article. A Kenyan man was so distraught by the lack of his “conjugal rights” he sued the organizers claiming he suffered from stress, mental anguish, backaches and lack of sleep as a result of the strike.

Where, I ask, is his sense of nationalism?

I think he left it at home, along with his dignity and self-respect.

The second article is cause for extreme concern. For those who are not aware, back in April Afghanistan passed an extremely controversial law that prevents women from declining a husband’s request for sex. It is a law that legalizes rape. Apparently President Hamid Karzai “missed” that particular provision. The law had so many articles he got tired of reading them all. Being a politician is really hard.

Afghani women refused to stand for this type of tyrannical legislation. They marched for their right to say no and suffered physical injuries as a result. Police in Afghanistan are not very attentive when it comes to protecting women protesters.

I hope these articles make you as sick as they made me. Both are suggesting the same thing; that sex is a RIGHT. We know this is blatantly untrue but some people don’t have this luxury. Can you imagine what it would be like to live in a country where this was not a given fact? Where you were told as a woman that you were required to have sex with your husband X times a week as part of your responsibilities as a dutiful wife?

I would like to think this attitude is not prevalent in our country but more and more I am seeing examples of this behavior to a much lesser degree. I would never dare to compare our situation to those of brave Kenyan and Afghani women but I do believe we experience this “sex is a right” concept a lot. Women are made to feel guilty if we withhold physically from someone we are dating because “they have needs.”

Newsflash; women have needs too. We, however, are capable of something called self-control. Take notes gentlemen…you are not entitled to anything physically. Ever. Drop the guilt-trip routine because any woman with half a brain won’t buy it, and we are sick and tired of shutting you down.

These stories made me realize how far women’s rights activists still have to go. I have recently complained to some of my friends how I am tired of being labeled “the feminist.” How I am defined by this alone...like when a friend makes a joke about getting something for me to eat and how it better be “feminist and vegetarian friendly or else.” It’s easy to get tired of the jokes and snide remarks.

All I need to revamp my faith in the cause is stories like these. Stories of women who are willing to use whatever power they have, even if it is simply their power to say no, to fight for change.

I thank God every day that I live in a country where no really does mean NO.

The Pursuit of Happiness: But Who Pursues Who?

Sixty years ago there was a formula to dating that was simple and straightforward. Boy meets girl, boy asks girl out for a milkshake, boy and girl drink milkshakes, boy takes girl home, then boy decides whether he enjoyed girl’s company enough to buy her another milkshake at a later time. If he did, he would call her again. He would "pursue" her.

This is somewhat archaic terminology glorifying the fact that men love the chase. Evolution will never get rid of this hunter/gatherer mentality. Yet somehow, this formula has not stood the test of time. It’s now unclear who is supposed to be pursuing who.

Putting yourself out there first is scary and rejection sucks. The benefit of the old formula was that this unfortunate responsibility was squarely on the man’s shoulders. A lot of women, including myself, selfishly wish it would stay this way but that is nothing more than reverse sexism. Equal rights means equal opportunity for rejection.

However the dilemma is this; women in general get a lot more attached a lot earlier on than men do. Even more dangerous, women tend to project feelings onto a potential relationship that are not even there. We convince ourselves that this “amazing guy” we met 10 days ago could be the one. Sure you haven’t gone on an honest-to-goodness date yet, but his text messages are SO sincere.

Then there are all the go-to excuses we use as to why a guy we feel a connection with WON‘T pursue us:
“He’s shy.”
“He’s intimidated by my professional success.”
“He’s intimidated by my ability to name all 50 states in alphabetical order. That’s why we went dutch on the bill, because he likes me but was intimidated and all.”

Obviously.

How do we avoid these inevitable justifications? We go on the defense. We choose to take the, “If he likes me he’ll pursue me” approach. Sit back, relax, and let them do all the work. Not necessarily the wrong decision, but is it the fair one?

Not really, but men are not great about asserting themselves if there isn’t anything in it for them. Within minutes of meeting you they have probably already decided whether you are friend-material or relationship-material, but they won’t come out and say which one you are because they don’t want to hurt your feelings. So, their actions end up speaking louder than words. We depend on them to make the first move so we know there is mutual interest and that our feelings are not a convoluted attempt to make something out of nothing.

Also if they aren’t man enough to ask you out, they may not be man enough to date you. Just putting that out there.

Unfortunately there is not a perfect solution to this problem, which is why I miss the “formulaic” 1950’s boy asks out girl approach. But, IDEALLY, I think we should get over ourselves, stop fearing rejection, and pursue someone if we are interested in them. Stop letting the boys have all the fun. If the attention isn’t immediately reciprocated, drop it and move on. If it’s meant to be, aggressive pursuit by either party should be pretty unnecessary. No rocket science involved, no endless re-readings of the Facebook message he sent you last week… "Is this a I’m-teasing-you-because-you’re-like-a-little-sister-to-me message or a -I’m-flirting-with-you-because-I-want-to-suck-face message?”

It’s a you-really-need-a-therapist-so-I-don’t-have-to-listen-to-you’re-unhealthy-obsessing message.